عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

"Resolution No. (246): "Ruling on Zakah of Associations and Unions' Funds"

Date Added : 04-12-2017

Resolution No. (246) by the Board of Iftaa', Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Zakah of Associations and Unions' Funds"

Date 2/Rabi' Al-Thani/1439 AH, corresponding to 21/11/2017 AD

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all of his family and companions.

During its 13th session held on the above date, the Board of Iftaa', Research and Islamic Studies reviewed the letter sent from the Chairman of Jordan Housing Developers Association, and reads as follows:" We would like to ask about the Sharia Ruling on the Zakah's Nisaab {Minimum amount liable for Zakah}of the nonprofit funds of the Associations and Unions such as Jordan Housing Developers Association whose incomes consist of membership fees and other members' annual subscriptions. Moreover, these funds are distributed on the association's activities, employees' salaries, rents and many other activities. Yet, the aforementioned association is a nonprofit party and aims to develop the career of constructing apartments and buildings as is the case with many other unions. The statute of the Association is included in the letter?

After prolonged deliberations, the Board decided the following:

Zakah is a commandment of Allah to a Muslim with the conditions clarified by the scripts of Sharia and the first of which is "Possession" referred to, by jurists, as "Specific owner" since it is stated in [Nihayat Al-Muhtaj vol.3/pp.127]: "Being possessed by a specific owner is among the conditions that make Zakah on wealth obligatory."

Similar to endowment funds, the Zakah condition (Specific owner or owners) doesn't apply to the afore parties. 

Moreover, Zakah is due on co-operative associations and other organizations that have a specific owner

or multiple shareholders. And Allah Knows Best. 

 

Chairman of Iftaa` Board,

Grand Mufti of Jordan,

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

Vice Chairman, Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Prof. Abdullah Al-Fawaz, Member

Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa, Member

Dr. Majid Darawsheh, Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Al-Hijjawi, Member

Judge Khalid Woraikat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zo`bi, Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

If someone fasts on the White Days with the intention of making up for missed fasts (qada), will they receive the reward for both voluntary and obligatory fasting?

Making up missed obligatory fasts (qada) is mandatory, and the intention for qada must be specified.
If a person makes up their missed Ramadan fasts on the White Days, they must intend qada, but they may also intend to fast the White Days, and Allah willing, they will receive the reward for both.
This is similar to entering a mosque and praying an obligatory prayer, where the person also earns the reward of Tahiyyat al-Masjid (greeting the mosque) if they intend both.
● If the person missed their fasts due to a valid excuse, they may wait and fast on the White Days.
● However, if they missed the fasts without a valid excuse, they must make up the fasts immediately and should not delay them until the White Days.

What is the ruling on someone who dies while having missed fasts?

● If a person dies before having the opportunity to make up the missed fasts—such as someone whose excuse (e.g., illness) persisted until their death—then no makeup fast (qada), fidyah, or sin applies to them.
● However, if they had the ability to make up the fasts but did not do so before passing away, the missed fasts must be compensated by giving a mudd of food for each missed day from their estate.
The Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever dies while having a month’s fast due, one needy person should be fed per day on their behalf." [Narrated by At-Tirmidhi]
Additionally, a guardian (wali) may fast on their behalf, as the Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever dies while having missed fasts, their guardian should fast on their behalf." [Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim]
In another narration: "If they wish." This indicates that both feeding the needy and fasting on behalf of the deceased are permissible options.

Is it permissible to agree with a butcher to purchase the meat of an animal after it has been slaughtered — for instance, by buying the meat of a sheep at a price determined by the weight of its meat following slaughter, at a fixed rate per kilogram? And what is the ruling if the animal is being purchased with the intention of it being an uḍḥiyyah (sacrificial offering)?

 
 
 
 
 

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is not permissible to sell livestock in the manner of pricing each kilogram of meat after slaughter at a fixed rate, because the meat within the animal prior to slaughter is unseen and unknown. This leads to jahālah (ignorance of the subject matter) and gharar (contractual uncertainty), both of which are among the invalidating factors in sales transactions.
However, it is permissible for the buyer to issue a promise to purchase the meat of the animal after slaughter at a specified price per kilogram, with the actual sale being concluded at the time of weighing the meat — at which point both the quantity of the goods and the total price become known. There is no Sharī'ah objection to this arrangement.
The jurists have stipulated that for a sale to be valid, both countervalues must be present and observable. Al-Khaṭīb al-Shirbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states:
"It is valid to sell a heap of grain whose total measure is unknown to both contracting parties at a rate of one sā' per dirham. This sale is valid because the subject of sale is present and observable, and ignorance of the total price is not harmful since it is known in detail — and uncertainty is thereby lifted."— [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.355]
As for the uḍḥiyyah, the 'aqīqah, and vowed blood sacrifices (al-dam al-mandhūr) — full ownership of the animal must be established prior to slaughter. It is not valid for such animals to be slaughtered while still in the ownership of the butcher. Rather, the animal must be purchased alive and then slaughtered with the intention of uḍḥiyyah or the like. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it incumbent on a husband to pay the alimony of his wife if she had left him and stayed at her parent`s without his permission?

When a wife leaves her house, and stays at her parent`s without asking her husband, she is considered a Nashiz (wife who refuses to abide by her husband’s orders), and so she doesn`t deserve an alimony.

See More